Exam (elaborations)
Hackleman Test 3 Cases LEGL 2700 Exam/Questions & Answers
Hackleman Test 3 Cases LEGL 2700 Exam/Questions & Answers
[Show more]
Content preview
Hackleman Test 3 Cases LEGL 2700Exam/Questions & Answers
(Al Minor v Martin) Al Minor and Associates v. Martin - -o X had a lot of
secrets and made people sign NDAs
o Y decided to use the skills he learned working at X to start his own
company
o Y quits and doesn't take any documents, but he calls X clients from his
memory and takes a lot of them
o Court rules that information doesn't have to be tangible, it can be
memorized and still be a trade secret
o Y found liable for taking trade secrets
-Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics - -o Y located two
genes that increase chance of breast/ovarian cancer
o Didn't create or alter the genes, just found them
o A patent for these genes would limit research in the field
o SCOTUS rules this is not patentable because all Y did was discover the
genes, just like finding a flower in a field
o Naturally occurring genes in human DNA are not patentable
-Kraft v Cracker Barrel Old Country Store - -o X had a type of cheese called
Cracker Barrel
o Y starts selling ham and such in grocery stores
o Kraft said that having Y's products in the same grocery stores as Kraft's
Cracker Barrel would be confusing to consumers
o District Court rules that Y can only sell their products in their stores and
online, not in grocery stores
-The Verve v. The Rolling Stones - -o X used a 5-note riff that had been used
in a song by Y
o Y manager still had rights to the riff and sued for 100% of profit
-Ali v. The United States - -o X had a corporation he used to build housing in
conjunction with the federal government (HUD)
o HUD stopped paying X's company because he stopped maintaining his
housing units
o X sued for breach of contract
o HUD counter-sued Ali's corporation saying Ali was the one who breached
o X had been using the corporation for personal use so the court "pierced the
veil" and X was completely personally liable
-(FCC v AT&T) Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T, Inc - -o
Limited corporate personhood
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Victorious23. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £6.78. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
79650 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now